Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 121 Ori
Judgement Date : 7 January, 2026
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK
Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 08-Jan-2026 11:29:03
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C). NO.19388 OF 2023
Jagannath Das .... Petitioner
Mr. S.S. Rao, Senior Advocate
being assisted by Mr. Suresh Choudhury, Advocate
-versus-
The Commissioner of Endowments, .... Opp. Parties
Odisha and another
Ms. Pratyusha Naidu, Advocate
(For Commissioner of Endowments)
Mr. Gouri Mohan Rath, Advocate
(For Opp. Party No.2)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No. 07.01.2026
11. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 13th March, 2023 (Annexure-14) passed by the Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in OA No.01 of 2010, whereby he refused to recall the order dated 19th March, 2021 and 23rd March, 2021 (Annexures-7 and 8 respectively).
3. In course of argument, Mr. Rao, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that there is no provision under the Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 (for brevity 'the Act') for review of the final judgment dated 23rd March, 2021. But, the Petitioner has a remedy under Section 28(5) of the Act to file an Appeal assailing the judgment dated 23rd March, 2021. He, therefore, prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to avail the remedy under Section 28(5) of the Act. He, however, submits that the delay in filing the Appeal may be considered liberally.
Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jan-2026 11:29:03
4. Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 submits that he has no objection to the prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition.
5. Ms. Naidu, learned counsel for Commissioner of Endowments, Odisha, Bhubaneswar submits that the only remedy available to the Petitioner is by filing an Appeal under Section 28(5) of the Act.
6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case of the Petitioner, disposes of the writ petition as withdrawn.
7. If the Petitioner files an Appeal under Section 28(5) of the Act, the petition for condonation of delay may be considered keeping in mind that the writ petition was pending before this Court since 21st June, 2023 till date.
8. Certified copy of document(s), if any filed, shall be returned to learned counsel for the Petitioner on substitution of attested photocopy thereof.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Rojalin Judge
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!